Latest from UKIP Daily

Short-changing the British people over Brexit

Are the British people being short-changed over Brexit by Mrs May, the Department for (not) Exiting the European Union (EU), the government generally, and Parliament (made up of supposedly knowledgeable and prudent representatives of the people)?  In the end the Brexit settlement achieved by Mrs May et al with the EU should correspond in large part to addressing the electorate’s significant wishes, hopes and fears as expressed in the referendum vote. What then are we not being told that we really should (in our interests) know?  What will be the political consequences if and when we find out the hard way that our leaders are misleading and cheating us?

The Brexit (Leave) vote was for a change of direction, in particular to leave the EU, which is evolving into a centralised homogeneous superstate. It was not for politics as usual or the status quo of an out of touch ruling establishment (in Westminster and Brussels) concealing the truth, using fear to manipulate people and doing what it wanted to whilst ignoring the wishes of the electorate.  Ultimately then it was about ‘the sovereignty of the people’ and their right to governed by consent; government of the people, by the people, for the people.  Brexit, therefore, needs to be seen to be an actual change of political direction, not the political EU (aka Greater Germany) under a different name aided and abetted by a deceptive Westminster clique.

The vote to remain in the EU, for whatever reason such as succumbing to Project Fear, ideological commitment to remote authoritarian rule or obsequiousness, was acceptance of the current status quo and perhaps also of the EU’s direction of travel.  Remain voters were effectively putting their trust in the ruling establishment (in Westminster and Brussels).  Any Brexit settlement outside their ‘comfort zone’ of EU membership therefore needs to provide something like the same measure of reassurance and (wherever practicable) address their real concerns.

Whilst it would appear the objectives of Leave and Remain voters are completely different, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they cannot, or should not, be reconciled in the resulting Brexit settlement.  To ignore the minority who voted Remain is tantamount to ‘dictatorship of the majority’ and un-British.  It is also quite likely that the economic fears of Remain voters are also shared to some extent by Leave voters, whilst many Remain voters share the Leave voters’ disillusionment with, and distrust of, the ruling elite, and have concerns about uncontrolled immigration and open borders. Political independence from the EU whilst maintaining close trading arrangements (such as through the Single Market) and co-operation should be achievable if Mrs May and Mr Davis understood how the EU thinks and works and followed the example set by other prosperous countries in Europe, but not in the EU.

The political establishment and main stream media are not presenting us with anything like the full picture on leaving the EU. In turn the resulting distortion is creating misconceptions about what can and cannot be achieved.

Firstly, if we re-join EFTA (the European Free Trade Association) we can remain in the Single Market (more accurately the European Economic Area, EEA) under different, much more flexible or bespoke conditions including allowing us to control immigration (by unilaterally invoking Article 112, the Safeguard Measures) in the EEA Agreement and leave the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice.

Secondly, the acquis (or body of law) of the EEA is about a quarter of the EU acquis and is needed to facilitate seamless trade.

Thirdly, about 80% of the EEA acquis originates outside the EU, to facilitate more global trade; we would (probably) need to comply with it anyway.

Fourthly, ‘all singing, all dancing’ free trade agreements (FTAs) take at least several years to negotiate and don’t provide seamless trade.

Fifthly, the EU is unlikely to agree to an advantageous FTA because it is not in the interests of their centralising control-freak political agenda.

Sixthly, outside the EEA we will be a ‘third country’ subject to vastly increased difficulty in trading with the protectionist EU through tariffs and non-tariff barriers including regulation, approvals and surveillance.

Mrs May and Mr Davis’s Transitional Deal and overall handling of Brexit so far has the potential to lead to dissatisfaction and disillusionment with many on both the Leave and Remain sides.  For the Leaver there is dissatisfaction that Brexit is not a clean break on 29th March 2019, but delayed costly servitude to the EU as effectively a vassal state for at least 21 months, and quite possibly even longer; there may be an indefinite ‘Brexit in name only’. For the Remainers motivated by Project Fear there is the adverse effect on the economy during the transition period or afterwards as the FTA, if it is ever actually negotiated, fails to meet expectations. For businesses there is continuing uncertainty and potential barriers to the seamless trade with the EU that will occur whether or not there is an FTA.

Since the Referendum the disillusionment with the ruling establishment has continued. It is perhaps a long term trend here, within the EU and in the United States.  Often decried as ‘populism’, it is a visible rejection by the left and right of the political spectrum of the status quo and its direction of travel. Rebellion against the political establishment of Conservative and Labour seeks alternative explanations and solutions, whether or not they are practical. However, perhaps equally or more significantly is the trend amongst the ruling class to become more insular and extreme rather than tone down their existing ideological views in response to their obvious unpopularity, impracticality or undesirable consequences.  Rather than seek to respond to the democratic wishes of the electorate, understand major issues and offer practical solutions they turn to wishful thinking, internecine squabbling and deception.

The Brexit dividend providing the opportunity for our country to reinvigorate freedom, enterprise, democracy and our world-leading traditional strengths, for the benefit of all is being wasted.  Unpredictable political change looks increasingly likely when the British people en masse conclude that the problem, making their lives and those of their children potentially worse, is the ruling class.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

14 Comments on Short-changing the British people over Brexit

  1. Time to end this treason!

    “Farage 2nd Referendum” Powell’s Prophecy Proves Right #Brexit

  2. PS You have the Union flag upside down in header.

  3. I totally disagree with the suggestion that we stay in the single market and are therefore subject to EU control of any sort. Does this writer not realise that since 1973 UK trade with the EU has cost us a DEFICIT currently totalling well over £1 trillion? The USA and China and many other countries have substantial trade with the EU without being members of the EU or the EEA. Being in the EU has possibly cost our country an overhead of £185 billion/year and getting out altogether and removing this cost will enable the UK to trade with the EU on similar terms as those countries lucky enough not to be members of the EU i.e. without a £185 billion/annum overhead due to EU membership. I agree with the other commentator who said the remainers can get stuffed as they did not care that the EU was costing us a fortune every year. They have NEVER as far as I can see justified why being tied to that disastrous club had any benefit to the UK taxpayers and citizens.

  4. “Whilst it would appear the objectives of Leave and Remain voters are completely different, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they cannot, or should not, be reconciled in the resulting Brexit settlement. To ignore the minority who voted Remain is tantamount to ‘dictatorship of the majority’ and un-British.”

    There is no way either side can be reconciled. Compromise is no longer possible, thanks to the behaviour of Remain since the referendum. Miller, Branson, Clegg, Adonis, Blair, Soubry, Clarke, Heseltine, Mandelson et al, have NEVER accepted the result. They have all being doing their best to crash Brexit by EVERY and ANY means possible, along with their MSM lackeys, big business and other EU flag supporting cheerleaders. Constant media downplaying, ad hom attacks and insults on Brexiteers, very ‘British’ behaviour indeed from Remainers.

    There is either Brexit or no Brexit, there is either Out or Not Out.
    There is no half way house, because half way is still IN. The ballot paper said leave or remain, not out in all but name, and that is why neither side can be reconciled.

    Dictatorship of the majority is also called DEMOCRACY, as Phil said earlier, most Kippers didn’t vote Blair, but we got him. Was he mercifully thinking of the minority when he changed the face of Britain forever? We will have to live with the damage he inflicted for ever.

    Frankly, I don’t give a damn for the remainers, they, after all didn’t give a damn when Britain’s sovereignty was handed over for 40 plus years to an un-elected, unaccountable cabal…were they concerned with our feelings and loss of freedoms? Hell no.
    As for remain, not so funny now the shoe is on the other foot, is it?

  5. Just as a point, those of us who have left or are about to leave still hold the same views on Brexit and most other UKIP policies as we always did. It’s simply that we’ve decided the party, or I should say the party “leadership” is now so obviously incapable of forming any sort of viable threat to the establishment that we are wasting our time in carrying on until or unless things change. Politics, some 5 years ago, was a hobby. After joining UKIP it soon became a full time, largly unpaid job. Bonkin Bolton was just the last of many very short straws.
    We can still contribute to pushing for proper Brexit and more sensible foreign and domestic policies. Some of us still have platforms as elected representatives, the others can help them, write to papers, post stuff online, join simple pressure groups and so on. What we should not do, ever, is to join one of the big 3 or to support candidates from them, particularly where UKIP stand.
    Personally, it will be nice to get some of my life back and to do and say what I want, rather like Nigel did but with a somewhat shorter life expectancy and thankfully much less media scrutiny in which to do it.

    • Exactly right, Icini – and as I posted yesterday some complain about people like me posting here, but I don’t interfere in UKIP business – I just feel it really important that we all try to work together for what brought us all together in the first place – the need to free our country from the clutches of Brussels.

    • I have told the branch at the last meeting I attended that I am happy to help with any Brexit campaigning, but I will no longer campaign for UKIP.

      I cannot in good conscience support a party which is pro-Halal, and which describes decent members concerned about Islam as “Nazi infiltrators”.

      I have no gripes with the grassroots members. It is those at the top who have trashed the party.

  6. Time for Farage to stop whinging and lead UKIP again, so we can all vote UKIP at every opportunity and put pressure on the Tories.

  7. There was no conditional exit on the ballot paper. We voted for out and that is what we need, no EU control by the back door.

    The EU is likely to be finished anyway when our financial contribution ends and the remaining members have to pay more.

  8. “To ignore the minority who voted Remain is tantamount to ‘dictatorship of the majority’ and un-British.

    Three times I didn’t vote for Tony Blair, and three times I was totally ignored, despite one of those times his being elected by under a quarter of the electorate.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.